News Breaking Down the 2016 POTUS Race Contenders & Issues

[mheslep]

Maybe not. Hillary Clinton stands to be indicted for mishandling classified (SAP) information. If so, she couldn't become President...

Very unlikely, but yes she could. With enough votes, a convicted gangster could become President. Natural born citizen, 35 yrs old, period. The US has has major politicians serving in office while in jail. Virginia recently had a legislator on day time release approved by the court to attend legislative duties, and then returned to jail at night. His criminal activity was public knowledge but this didn't stop the will of the people, in this case, from returning the guy to his office.

 

[Astronuc]

With 95.83% precincts reporting in Wa state: Sanders, 18092 votes (72.58%); Clinton, 6790 votes (27.24%). Sanders won all the counties.

The Latest: Sanders trims Clinton's delegate lead
http://news.yahoo.com/latest-bustling-caucus-sites-washington-state-201127069--election.html

 

[Evo]

With 95.83% precincts reporting in Wa state: Sanders, 18092 votes (72.58%); Clinton, 6790 votes (27.24%). Sanders won all the counties.

The Latest: Sanders trims Clinton's delegate lead
http://news.yahoo.com/latest-bustling-caucus-sites-washington-state-201127069--election.html

Too bad Sanders is unlikely to be able to beat Trump, IMO, let's hope Clinton wins the Dem nomination.

 

[HossamCFD]

Too bad Sanders is unlikely to be able to beat Trump, let's hope Clinton wins the Dem nomination.

The polls actually show that Sanders is a lot stronger than Clinton against all Republican candidates, not just Trump (who's the only Republican candidate losing to both Sanders and Clinton by double digits)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html

 

[Astronuc]

Too bad Sanders is unlikely to be able to beat Trump,

I think Sanders could possibly beat Trump in a general election. But it is perhaps more likely that Clinton will win at the convention, if not before. Let's see how well Clinton or Sanders does in the remaining contests, especially, NY, PA, NJ and CA.Final tally in Wa.

Sanders   19059  72.7%

Clinton    7140  27.1%

Uncom.       46   0.2%

 

[jim hardy]

GOP is having a Hamlet scale family feud. Kasich could walk in like Fortinbras expressing amazement at all the political carnage.

Dems have this little problem

I will not be one bit surprised if we get to choose between .Kasich and Sanders .

 

[Astronuc]

Interesting scenarios

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/16/upshot/trump-cruz-kasich-republican-delegate-lead.html
Trump needs 44% of the remaining delegates to win the nomination. If Cruz or Kasich were to win Ca, that would probably result in a brokered or contested convention.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/16/upshot/clinton-sanders-democratic-delegate-lead.html
Sanders needs 58% of remaining delegates (after March 15) to prevent Clinton from cinching the nomination. He did 81.6% of votes in Alaska (and 13/16 or 81.3% of delegates) and 72.6% of votes in Wa (and 23/31 or 74% delegates) . However, Wa has to go through more caucuses and conventions to allocate the remaining delegates to the national convention, and there are another 80 delegates by the math.

 

[Derek Francis]

Sanders could beat Trump due to having a lower unfavorability rating. Plus being a general election candidate is a sure way to boost your name recognition.

Sanders needs 58% of delegates to get his respective nomination, as you said. Trump only needs 55%, so 58% doesn't seem like a lot. But Sanders would have to win almost every state and would have to do big numbers in several of them. Still a long shot, but we'll see.

Trump is benefitted from the fact that his field was split and he's been having the most votes of the candidates. The GOP could replace Trump with another candidate but they won't because it would damage their chances of winning the general election for a number of reasons.

 

[Astronuc]

Sanders won in Hawaii with nearly 70% of the vote. Sanders gets 17 delegates to Clinton's 8.

Sanders   23,530   69.8%

Clinton   10,125   30.0%

Update on Wa, Sanders got 25 of 34 or 64% of delegates, so there are 67 additional delegates up for grabs.

 

[Astronuc]

Sanders on Clinton’s Clooney fundraiser: ‘It is obscene’
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-clooney-hillary-clinton-171452613.html

Clinton is asking donors for $353,400 for two seats at the head table with herself, Clooney and his wife, Amal, at the April 15 event in San Francisco. The next night, the Clooneys will host a $33,400 per person fundraiser for Clinton at the couple’s Los Angeles home.

Must be nice to have rich friends. Hard to believe that $$$ don't buy influence.Sanders hails 'momentum' after trouncing Clinton in three states
http://news.yahoo.com/sanders-beats-clinton-washington-democratic-caucuses-224911792.html

Sanders has drawn strong support from voters with a populist message that rails against police brutality, a too-low minimum wage, soaring student debt and other societal ills.

In particular, millennials and first-time voters have been flocking to Sanders' message of economic equality, universal health care, and his call to reduce the influence of billionaires on the campaign finance system.

Sanders also pointed to a series of national polls that show him consistently doing better than Clinton against Donald Trump, Ted Cruz or Ohio governor John Kasich -- the three Republicans who remain in the hunt for their party's nomination.

Apparently, at least 230,000 Washington Democrats participated in our 2016 precinct caucuses, and someone mentioned a bigger turnout than in 2008.

Interesting perspective - Despite The Math, Bernie Sanders Has Already Won
http://www.npr.org/2016/03/27/472056754/despite-the-math-bernie-sanders-has-already-won

 

[Astronuc]

No guns allowed at Republican convention: Secret Service
http://news.yahoo.com/no-guns-allowed-republican-convention-secret-010424152.htmlMeanwhile, Trump looks to decertify Louisiana delegates
He doesn't like the way the folks in Louisiana run their own show.
http://news.yahoo.com/trump-threatens-lawsuit-over-louisiana-delegates-164158979--election.html

Donald Trump spent 100(!) minutes talking foreign policy with New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and David Sanger. The duo wrote a story -- and the Times released an edited transcript, which Chris Cillizza annotated.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...licy-to-the-new-york-times-im-still-confused/

 

[jim hardy]

No guns allowed at Republican convention: Secret Service
http://news.yahoo.com/no-guns-allowed-republican-convention-secret-010424152.html

good.

 

[WWGD]

We're in good hands with Trump. I was watching him being interviewed by Charlie Sykes, a Conservative talk-show host. Trump was asked whether he thought he should apologize to Cruz for mocking his (Cruz') wife. Trump's reply : " He started it ". Good, we are working at a high school level. Kasich seems like the only reasonable candidate on the Right.

 

[Derek Francis]

Right now, my stance on this election is neutral. I'm an Independent. Here's my personal pros and cons sheet of both candidates.

Donald Trump
Pros: Has lots of administrative experience ; favors American interests ; wants to re-examine NAFTA/TPP ; was anti-Iraq ; shook up the Republican establishment ; Isn't owned by lobbyists/PAC's ; Beneath his persona, he seems very prudent and intelligent. ; His run has energized voters on both sides
Cons: Panders to xenophonia ; Is a protectionist ; Offers almost no policy specifics ; Has named very few advisors ; His tax plan will add trillions to the debt

Ted Cruz
Pros: He's plain-spoken
Cons: No administrative experience ; No negotiating skills ; Is the most extremely conservative candidate running ; His tax plan is regressive will add trillions to the debt

John Kasich
Pros: By far the most professional of all the candidates in the race ; Promotes positivity/tolerance/respect ; The only major candidate with governing experience ; Actually told us who he would have in our administration ; Would probably be the most competent administrator of the choices we have ;
Cons: Supports most of the same stuff as Cruz/Trump, just with a nicer softer tone

Gary Johnson
Pros: Is the least hawkish on foreign policy ; Is most pro-freedom on social issues ; Is looking more appealing as this election is getting nasty
Cons: Is far to my right on economic issues ; Won't win

Jill Stein
Pros: I agree with her on a majority of issues ; She cares about the environment
Cons: She won't win ; She's somewhat into all-natural conspiracy thing

Hillary Clinton
Pros: Offers policy specifics ; Has experience ; Is the most well-rounded candidate
Cons: Voted for Iraq (worst decision in modern history) ; Arab Spring was a failure ; flip flops often ; too establishment/dynastic politics

Bernie Sanders
Pros: Has the most integrity of the major candidates ; Has stood against PAC's ; Wants to regulate big banks and money interests ; Is the least hawkish on foreign policy amongst the major candidates
Cons: Is dense with policy and numbers ; Has a terrible temperament for negotiating/compromising ; Wants open immigration and welfare system at the same time - bad combo ; Is running a campaign of anger similar to Trump

For someone partisan, this would be a very easy choice. Me as an independent, I have to balance numerous factors. I want someone who's anti-establishment but can govern to. Who is passionate, but can be diplomatic. Has a grand vision, but is also detail oriented. Has intregrity/prinicples, but knows how to negotiate and compromise. I'm not sure if any of the candidates really speak to me.

 

[Dembadon]

Donald Trump
Pros: Has lots of administrative experience ; favors American interests ; wants to re-examine NAFTA/TPP ; was anti-Iraq ; shook up the Republican establishment ; Isn't owned by lobbyists/PAC's ; Beneath his persona, he seems very prudent and intelligent. ; His run has energized voters on both sides
Cons: Panders to xenophonia ; Is a protectionist ; Offers almost no policy specifics ; Has named very few advisors ; His tax plan will add trillions to the debt

emphasis mine
I think one needs policy specifics and more details about what he plans to do about the issues in order to conclude anything about his intelligence or prudence.

For someone partisan, this would be a very easy choice.

Would you mind expanding on this? I'm not seeing how the criteria you've listed is exclusive to independents.

 

[mheslep]

was anti-Iraq

Where do you obtain that notion, prior to the invasion?

 

[Derek Francis]

Where do you obtain that notion, prior to the invasion?

I understand that while the [Iraq] invasion was going on, Trump's stance was essentially "I'm not sure why we're here, but it might be a good reason if the US government says its a top priority". I think this was the stance of many Americans at the time. However, shortly after, when it became apparent the war wasn't going well, he went on national television numerous time during Bush's tenure and advocated for troops to come home. Meanwhile, Hillary was defending her decision to vote for it.

For all of Trump's many faults, I know he would have the judgment to the U.S. in an extraneous military conflict that would be against American interests. With Hillary, especially seeing her record as Secretary of State, I'm not so sure. I also, strangely enough, agree with Trump and Putin on Syria more than Hillary, Obama and the establishment Republicans.

 

[mheslep]

On the contrary, many of the Democrats who voted for the use of force against Iraq later became sharply critical of the war, arguing that their vote to authorize force called instead for further diplomacy. The template in my view was the then Majority Leader Harry "the war is lost" Reid, after he too voted for the invasion.http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Harry_Reid_War_+_Peace.htm

 

[gleem]

; Beneath his persona, he seems very prudent and intelligent.

You can see something acceptable beneath his persona? Please tell me how you see anything but chaos if he is elected. While caught apparently off guard when asked about whether he favors punishment for women you had an abortion, which he said they should, he recanted his stand (presumably after being advised about this comment) saying only the doc's should be held responsible and that the women are victims as if they where abducted and the fetuses involuntarily removed. .He says use of nuclear weapons should be "left on the table" for use in the Middle East and Europe. How would you like to be his adviser?

 

[jim hardy]

While caught apparently off guard when asked about whether he favors punishment for women you had an abortion, which he said they should,

He and Matthews were trying to trap each other.
Matthews checkmated him.
Do or do you not prosecute all parties participating in an illegal act ?
Trump answered "yes" . Media feeding frenzy..
Answer of "No" would be contrary to 'equal treatment under the law'. Has anyone pointed that out ?

Trump's mistake was though as you say, recanting.Some you win some you lose.

 

[Hornbein]

BS isn't going to win the Presidency, but it was nevertheless a huge victory. His followers went from being a rabble who never got anything to a major force. Laws and appointments are for sale. You've got to pay to get anything. The people have realized that: if they are ever going to get anything, they have to pay. It makes a big difference.

In politics one must be patient. It usually takes decades of small -- sometimes very small -- victories to make a big change. Getting such and such judge appointed, getting some obscure law passed, etc. It's like putting together bricks to make a house. It requires many years of steady effort.

As a model for change, look at the Republican methods since the Powell memo. They had a long-term plan and executed it very successfully. They paid, and got those laws and appointments. There is much to be learned from this, whether or not you like the result.

Politics will adjust to win Sanders voters but much more important, to get their money. I gave a bunch of money to Sanders for this reason. I didn't think he'd win, but the D's would covet that money. They would change their course to get it. That's what happened in 1992. Perot didn't win, but his agenda dominated the next two years. The D's wanted those votes and that money.

The Presidency is about foreign affairs. It doesn't matter much for money issues, which completely dominate the scene. What really matters for that is Congress. To win Congress you need a nationwide political organization. To form that, you have to get on corporate media. To do that, B had to run for President. Winning the office is very much secondary.

 

[Hornbein]

Sanders on Clinton’s Clooney fundraiser: ‘It is obscene’
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-clooney-hillary-clinton-171452613.html
Must be nice to have rich friends. Hard to believe that $$$ don't buy influence.

In 1952 Richard Nixon almost got kicked off of the R ticket for accepting $18,000 over four years for job-related expenses like mailing out Christmas cards ($4200). The largest donor gave $1000. It was felt that this would buy too much influence over him.

Nowadays a potential candidate gives a dinner speech and gets $250,000 for unrestricted personal use. Repeat to make millions for doing virtually nothing. We are supposed to think that this is OK. I don't.

 

[gleem]

In 1952 Richard Nixon almost got kicked off of the R ticket for accepting $18,000 over four years

That is equivalent o at least $160,000 in today's dollars. admittedly still low compared to contributions today.

 

[gleem]

Just checking on postage first class started at 3 cents in 1952 so his Christmas card bill in today's dollars would be $70,000. That would raise some eyebrows today.

 

[mheslep]

...
Answer of "No" would be contrary to 'equal treatment under the law'. Has anyone pointed that out ?

Go to a doctor and he forks over a couple gallons of Oxy and opiates. He breaks the law, not you.

Some you win some you lose.

Some you think about because there are large consequences, and some you shoot your mouth off when all you care about is getting higher ratings than Jerry Springer.

 

[Hornbein]

That is equivalent o at least $160,000 in today's dollars. admittedly still low compared to contributions today.

Just checking on postage first class started at 3 cents in 1952 so his Christmas card bill in today's dollars would be $70,000. That would raise some eyebrows today.

Congressmen have the "frank," which means they don't pay postage. I would think that the cost was the cards and hiring people to address them. It was all done by hand.

 

[Astronuc]

GOP pollster: Here’s how we know Trump has no chance in November
Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article69428282.html

Well - Cruz is gaining traction and Kasich is still in.

 

[rootone]

If Trump becomes the inspiration for America as a leader for a better future ...
Nah forget it, I don;t live there

 

[jim hardy]

Go to a doctor and he forks over a couple gallons of Oxy and opiates. He breaks the law, not you.

Are you sure ?

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/pubs/manuals/pract/section5.htm
While some states and many insurance carriers limit the quantity of controlled substance dispensed to a 30-day supply, there are no specific federal limits to quantities of drugs dispensed via a prescription. For Schedule II controlled substances, an oral order is only permitted in an emergency situation.

May or may not be illegal depending on where you are.

Bring a fetus to the doctor and abort it. You're both parties to that act.
It may or may not be illegal depending on where you are .

But you are right - Trump didn't think that one through. He should have regained control of the conversation before addressing that question.

 

[Astronuc]

Interesting analysis

If Donald Trump Loses Wisconsin To Ted Cruz, Trump May Lose The GOP Nomination
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aviksar...to-ted-cruz-trump-may-lose-the-gop-nomination

Wisconsin votes on Tuesday, April 5. Some people have described Wisconsin as a “winner take all” state, but it’s somewhere in between that and a proportional allocation process. Wisconsin will allocate 42 delegates. 18 will go to the candidate who wins a plurality of the statewide vote. Three delegates will go to the winner of the plurality of the vote in each of Wisconsin’s eight congressional districts.

California on June 7 is the biggest wildcard

Key dates after Wisconsin include April 19, when New York votes; and April 26, when Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Pennsylvania vote. Many of those states should be favorable territory for Donald Trump. Of note, only 17 of Pennsylvania’s 71 delegates are bound to the statewide winner; the remainder go into the convention unbound: a dangerous prospect for Trump.

Ultimately, we won’t know Trump’s fate until June 7, when the biggest state of them all—California—goes to the polls, and puts its 172 delegates up for grabs. Also at stake are Montana, New Mexico, New Jersey, and South Dakota.

We live in interesting times - unfortunately.

Megyn Kelly has a theory about why Donald Trump hates her
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...-megyn-kelly-donald-trump-20160402-story.html
KELLY: "I think it's very clear to him that he cannot control the editorial on my show, or from me, in a debate or other setting."

 

[Astronuc]

According to FOX News

Kasich is now considered the only remaining candidate that the Republican establishment could try to nominate in a contested convention.

but

Sen. Ted Cruz is making the case that GOP presidential rival John Kasich and his pesky campaign cannot win the party nomination unless he has top showings in eight states -- an argument that could help Cruz in the upcoming Wisconsin primary and the GOP White House race.
. . . .
Kasich has won only one contest, his home-state of Ohio, and he has finished in second-place or tied for second in five others.

An interesting analysis of Trump's supporters
What Trump Supporters Were Doing Before Trump
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-trump-supporters-were-doing-before-trump/

Already, we know a fair bit about Trump supporters. Demographically, they are often white, male and without college degrees. They are disproportionately drawn from the ranks of registered Democrats who vote like Republicans. (Or else they’re named Chris Christie.)

In a recent post, Sean Trende and David Byler push back against explanations of Trump that focus solely on prejudice: “There is also a strong strain of anti-elite sentiment in the country right now, and Trump taps into that.” What’s more, there appears to be an economic underpinning to Trump support. As John Sides and Michael Tesler show, people who are dissatisfied with their financial situation are more likely to back Trump as well.

 

[jim hardy]

Einstein on reporters
(Sorry - best copy i could find)

 

[Astronuc]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...mary-says-he-voiced-displeasure-to-rnc-chair/
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said it's "not fair" that he is required to get 1,237 delegates in order to win his party's nomination. (Reuters)

Seriously?!

MILWAUKEE — Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Sunday called on Ohio Gov. John Kasich to drop out of the GOP nominating contest, accusing him of siphoning away potential Trump voters and telling reporters that he expressed his displeasure while meeting with Republican National Committee officials last week.

Somehow, I don't think anyone is siphoning voters away from Trump.

Battleground Wisconsin: A Trump loss to Cruz could reshape GOP race
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...31881a-f9a5-11e5-80e4-c381214de1a3_story.html

And apparently, Cruz has a slight lead in Wisconsin.

 

[mheslep]

[QUOTE="Astronuc, post:

And apparently, Cruz has a slight lead in Wisconsin.

Cruz up 6.8 points average, as much as 10 pts in one poll.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/wi/wisconsin_republican_presidential_primary-3763.html

 

[jim hardy]

The media blitzkrieg is working.

 

[Astronuc]

'Palin calls on Republicans to unify behind Trump candidacy at GOP dinner' or 'Palin fails in Wisconsin'
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ify-behind-trump-candidacy-at-gop-dinner.html

 

[mheslep]

Clinton and Sanders have both come out strongly opposed to domestic oil and gas production via hydraulic fracturing, and now trade sharp rhetoric about who is the most stringent in their opposition.

" No, I do not support fracking,” he [Sanders] said to cheers from the debate crowd in Flint, Mich.
Clinton said she opposes individual fracking operations if a series of conditions are met: if local communities oppose it, if the drilling releases methane or contaminates water or if fracking operators aren't required to identify the chemicals they are using.

“By the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where fracking will continue to take place,” she said.

“First, we’ve got to regulate everything that is currently underway, and we’ve got to have a system in place that prevents further fracking unless conditions like the ones I have mentioned are met.”

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-en...wer-is-a-lot-shorter-than-clinton-on-fracking

In my view the positions are bizarre in multiple ways. First, shutting down domestic production simply means a switch back to imported oil and gas with all of its geopolitical consequences. Second, the federal government has no authority without new law to stop fracking on private land, given the EPA has already pronounced it safe to groundwater when done responsibly (true of any industrial operation). Third, eliminating cheap gas removes the largest factor in the reduction of US emissions from the electric grid by way of gas displacing coal. Fourth, banning fracking would destroy one of brightest lights in the otherwise flagging economy, desperately in need of good paying jobs.

If striking a pose to save the environment is the general idea, then maybe both campaigns could stop flying as recommended by the NYT and go from NY to LA by bus.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/28/science/what-is-climate-change.html

 

[Astronuc]

With only 27-28% of precincts reporting so far, various news agencies are declaring Cruz and Sanders winners of their respective primaries.

Cruz gets 24 delegates (he had > 50% of the vote so far), Trump 0 and Kasich 0. Kasich is a distant 3rd.

Sanders has about 53.4% of the vote to Clinton's 46.4%, or about a 7% lead. Sanders would get 44 delegates and Clinton 28. Wisconsin has 86 delegates to the democratic national convention.

Some interesting commentary if one is tired of the usual.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/wisconsin-primary-presidential-election-2016/

Update1:
With 64% of polls reported for republicans:
Cruz 378,524 (49.6%), Trump 254,348 (33.4%), Kasich 111,010 (14.6%)

With 66% of poll reported for democrats:
Bernie Sanders 394,852 (56.0%), Hillary Clinton 308,303 (43.7%)

Update2:
With 70% of polls reported for GOP:
Cruz has 33 delegates and Trump has picked up 3. Cruz now has less than 50% of the vote.

With 72% of poll reported for democrats:
Sanders has 45 delegates to Clinton's 31.

Clinton campaign: Bernie Sanders trying to overturn will of voters
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary...sanders-is-trying-to-overturn-will-of-voters/

 

[Astronuc]

Kasich racks up another humiliating loss - WP harsh on Kasich
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog.../06/kasich-racks-up-another-humiliating-loss/

. . . after Wisconsin’s balloting that his 31st loss out of 32 contests tells him something.

Kasich not only came in third, but also came in a distant third in a Midwestern state that should have been ideally suited for his message of good governance. He has now come in third or worse in all Midwestern states (i.e. Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan and Illinois) other than his own.

With just over 155,000 votes and 14 percent of the vote in Wisconsin, Kasich managed to win less than half of second-place Trump’s vote totals (more than 386,000 and 35 percent). Kasich now has finished third or worse in 26 of the 32 contests. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) dropped out of the race more than three weeks ago and still has more delegates (171 to 143) and about a half-million more popular votes than Kasich. . . .

Well - he is an underdog, and a deep one at that.

 

[Astronuc]

Seven ways Donald Trump is just like the Founding Fathers
https://www.yahoo.com/news/7-ways-donald-trump-is-just-1402033286914102.html

It's that bad?!

 

[Evo]

Seven ways Donald Trump is just like the Founding Fathers
https://www.yahoo.com/news/7-ways-donald-trump-is-just-1402033286914102.html

It's that bad?!

What I don't see is a comparison of today's issues, Trumps talk of a wall, deportation, etc... That would be interesting. What issues were they facing at the time?

It was sad, today at the grocery store I came across a Muslim woman in traditional Muslim clothing and head scarf. Even though she was inside her car, she seemed afraid to make eye contact, normally a person, when you allow them right of way, even though I had right of way, would nod, smile, wave, somehow acknowledge you are there and allowing them to break the rules. I think she was just wanting to get out, not that she was being rude or obnoxious. I think small things like this need to be impressed that breaking the law, almost causing a collision and pretending she's done nothing wrong are things they need to improve on if they wish to be accepted.

 

[jtbell]

Trump won the South Carolina GOP primary, therefore all 50 SC delegates must vote for him on the first ballot at the national convention. After that, they're up for grabs. But most of the actual delegates haven't been selected yet. That will happen during congressional-district conventions this month, and the state GOP convention in May. Competition for second-ballot votes is heating up.

Jerry Rovner, chairman of the S.C. GOP in the 7th congressional district, said his wife received a call encouraging her to vote for a slate of delegates for Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who is running second. Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s campaign has hired S.C. operatives to run his national delegate push.

SC GOP’s national delegate race drawing big interest (The State, Columbia SC)

 

[gjonesy]

I came across a Muslim woman in traditional Muslim clothing and head scarf. Even though she was inside her car, she seemed afraid to make eye contact,

That particular behavior could be suggestive of many things including fear but not limited to it. The times in which we live and the circumstances under which we conduct ourselves can have an impact on others, but so can countless other factors as well, their views of us, their religious beliefs. Even among American born and raised Muslims there are varying attitudes. I work with a Muslim officer who has a very interesting view of American living today. He is faithful at the same time cautious because he is a target either way.

 

[gjonesy]

What I don't see is a comparison of today's issues, Trumps talk of a wall, deportation, etc... That would be interesting. What issues were they facing at the time?

As a new country, I highly doubt the political problems of the day could in any way be comparable. Campaign mud slinging has been a staple of politics and IMHO only serves to distract the voting population from real issues. There are things about both sides and every popular candidate that I do not find appealing. How do you select the best of the worst candidate pool in resent history?

 

[Astronuc]

Indiana hasn’t even voted and convention delegates are already lined up against the front-runner.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/donald-trump-indiana-primary-221747#ixzz45L2Ep1M5

 

[Derek Francis]

I think I'm starting to agree with Bill O'Reilly that Sanders and Trump are the same guy. While their beliefs and policies are vastly different, they effectively using the same marketing techniques to get voters. It's funny because liberals and conservatives alike would never compare their candidate to the other.

Trump and Sanders both are:

• ~70 year old New Yorkers, running a campaign on anger
  
• Are anti-establishment populists
  
• Declining money from banks, PAC's and special interests
  
• Life-long independents who recently joined a major political party.
  
• Appealing to the working class by denouncing trade agreements.
• Very repetitive and mainly focus on a handful of issues.
  
• Make simple arguments and generally avoid complex details
• Against the Iraq War and George Bush.
  
• Pushing their respective parties away from the center
• Blaming all the countries problems on one group (Sanders: the rich ; Trump: foreigners)

 

[Astronuc]

Sanders won the Wyoming caucuses with 156 votes (55.7%) to Clinton's 124 (44.3%), but they each get 7 delegates.

There were no republican caucuses or primaries today. Wyoming's republican caucus was March 12, which Ted Cruz won with 66.3%, Rubio placed second with 19.5%, Trump was third with 7.2%, and Kasich got zip.

Delegate results
Republicans
1,237 needed for nomination · 867 still available

Trump  743, needs  494
Cruz   532, needs  705
Kasich 143, needs 1094

Democrats
2,383 needed for nomination · 1,941 still available

Clinton 1,756 (1,287 pledged, 469 super), needs  627
Sanders 1,068 (1,037 pledged,  31 super), needs 1315

 

[jduster]

Saw the Hillary-Sanders debate. It's sad that their debate was much more akin to a Republican debate than the earlier more civil debates they had. It was heavy in anger, personal attacks, finger pointing and blaming. Also heavy on bragging about whose winning in the polls. Light on actual substance. Both candidates played out their routine and nothing new was gained out of this.

 

[WWGD]

Saw the Hillary-Sanders debate. It's sad that their debate was much more akin to a Republican debate than the earlier more civil debates they had. It was heavy in anger, personal attacks, finger pointing and blaming. Also heavy on bragging about whose winning in the polls. Light on actual substance. Both candidates played out their routine and nothing new was gained out of this.

Specially bad for Sanders, whose main claim to fame is precisely being different, being above the usual politics.

 

[Astronuc]

John Kasich: The GOP ‘doesn’t like ideas’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog.../04/20/john-kasich-the-gop-doesnt-like-ideas/

“Frankly, my Republican Party doesn’t like ideas,” Kasich said in an interview with The Post’s editorial board Wednesday morning. “They want to be negative against things.” There have been exceptions, he noted, such as Jack Kemp and Paul Ryan. But, he said, “most of ’em — the party is kind of a knee-jerk against.”

Kasich does not argue that the party has become too conservative. Kasich is himself quite right-wing. He instead argues that Republicans are often simply unreasonable. “I think we’ve over-dramatized our situation,” he said, countering the apocalyptic campaign narratives of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, who spin tales about dark forces ruining the country. “We’ve had worse times in this country, far worse times in this country. We’ll be fine.” In another election, Kasich’s pitch might have proved more effective. This year, reasonableness is even less popular than usual among GOP voters.